Sequoia ForestKeeper et al v. Watson et al

Filing 16

ORDER After Scheduling Conference; ORDER Setting Further Scheduling Conference/Status Conference, signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 5/5/2017. Further Scheduling Conference/Status Conference set for 3/2/2018 at 09:00 AM in Bakersfield, 510 19th Street before Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston. Status report re NEPA review due by 6/16/2017. (Hall, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

SEQUOIA FORESTKEEPER, et al.,
Plaintiffs,

12
13
14
15
16
17

v.
KEVIN ELLIOTT, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No.: 1:16-cv-01865 AWI JLT
ORDER AFTERSCHEDULING CONFERENCE;
ORDER SETTING FURTHER SCHEDULING
CONFERENCE/STATUS CONFERENCE

At issue in this litigation are three prospective logging operations location on lands of the

18

United States Forest Service; the Joey Project, the Summit Project and the Bald Mountain Project.

19

(Doc. 14) As to each of these projects, the USFS will make a determination as to whether further

20

review under the National Environmental Policy Act is required. (Id.) As to the Joey and Bald

21

Mountain projects, these determinations are not likely to be made until spring of 2018 and no

22

logging operations will occur in 2017. (Id.) As to the Summit Project, the determination about the

23

further NEPA review should be made later this month. (Id.) If the USFS determines no further

24

review is warranted, it intends the logging operation to begin in July 2017. (Id.)

25

At the scheduling conference, the Court inquired of plaintiffs’ counsel whether they were

26

prepared to have the case scheduled in order to be prepared for the possibility that the Summit

27

Project would go forward. The Court suggested that if it was later determined the project would not

28

go forward, it would entertain a stipulation to vacate or amend the case schedule. However,
1

1

plaintiff’s counsel agreed with the suggestion of the defendants’ attorneys, that no schedule issue at

2

this time and that the Court set a further scheduling conference/status conference in March 2018.

3

Counsel anticipate that by this time the NEPA determinations will be made as to each project and, if

4

it turns out the Summit Project will go forward in 2017, plaintiffs’ counsel indicated they would

5

proceed via a motion for injunction. Thus, the Court ORDERS:

6
7
8
9
10
11

1.

A further scheduling conference/status conference is set on March 2, 2018. The

parties SHALL file a joint scheduling report/status report no later than February 23, 2018;
2.

No later than June 16, 2017, counsel for the defendants SHALL file a status report

indicating the results of the USFS determination as to whether it will conduct a further NEPA review
as to the Summit Project;
3.

In the event the USFS determines that no further NEPA review is warranted as to any

12

of the three projects, counsel for the defendants SHALL give notice to counsel for the plaintiffs

13

within 24 business hours;

14

4.

The USFS SHALL NOT allow the logging operations to begin as to any of the three

15

projects unless it has first given plaintiffs’ counsel 15 days’ notice of the intent to begin the

16

operations.

17
18
19
20

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

May 5, 2017

/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2